Topic: Hey tteh, something is wrong.
Erik !saAqdaazn2 started this discussion 1 year ago #121,094
When a thread has new replies you can click on the new and it takes you to the latest replies but now it doesn't.
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 1 hour later[^] [v] #1,324,594
Agree, it leaves you at the top of the thread. Also if you then go back it used to be the new replies number was gone but now it still displays until you manually refresh.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 53 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,324,601
Yeah tteh fix this or I'm undibscribing from Minichan Premium and demanding a full refund.
Dana !N3luHurry2 joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 6 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,324,602
Erik !saAqdaazn2 (OP) replied with this 1 year ago, 24 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,324,605
Anonymous B replied with this 1 year ago, 7 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,324,606
Dana !N3luHurry2 replied with this 1 year ago, 5 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,324,609
Anonymous B replied with this 1 year ago, 5 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,324,611
tteh !MemesToDNA joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 10 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,324,612
@OP
When did this start happening? I've not had that issue (yet) but I'll look into it.
@1,324,594 (B)
Ugh I did notice that a while ago myself, but I thought it was a caching issue on my end. :(
GHOUL I shall investigate.
When did this start happening? I've not had that issue (yet) but I'll look into it.
@1,324,594 (B)
Ugh I did notice that a while ago myself, but I thought it was a caching issue on my end. :(
Green !!bO/s3MBcD joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 1 hour later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,324,615
Fine for me.
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 2 hours later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,324,638
Works on my machine
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 16 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,324,641
Its been doing this on my phone
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 7 hours later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,324,667
@1,324,602 (Dana !N3luHurry2)
You can use a referrel code and nominal fee to get access to the vip board but it's not worth it since they removed the gold stars to be pc.
You can use a referrel code and nominal fee to get access to the vip board but it's not worth it since they removed the gold stars to be pc.
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 5 hours later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,324,682
@1,324,612 (tteh !MemesToDNA)
> When did this start happening? I've not had that issue (yet) but I'll look into it.
>
> Ugh I did notice that a while ago myself, but I thought it was a caching issue on my end. :(
>
>GHOUL I shall investigate.
It's a punishment from upstream. The ghost of RMS is angry that you aren't publishing recent changes to the code as free and open source software anymore.
> When did this start happening? I've not had that issue (yet) but I'll look into it.
>
> Ugh I did notice that a while ago myself, but I thought it was a caching issue on my end. :(
>
>
It's a punishment from upstream. The ghost of RMS is angry that you aren't publishing recent changes to the code as free and open source software anymore.
(Edited 4 minutes later.)
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 1 year ago, 3 days later, 4 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,325,133
FAO TTEH this is still broken on mobile.
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 6 minutes later, 4 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,325,135
Accessing Minichan on your phone is for fags.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 1 year ago, 1 day later, 6 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,325,287
Ok it works now. Thank you for fixing it tteh. If it doesn't work for other people, don't worry about it. They can figure it out for themselves. The important part is resolved.
Green !!bO/s3MBcD replied with this 1 year ago, 4 hours later, 6 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,325,325
It was never broken for me, I feel like I've been missing out 😡
boof replied with this 1 year ago, 1 minute later, 6 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,325,328
tteh !MemesToDNA replied with this 1 year ago, 1 month later, 1 month after the original post[^] [v] #1,329,916
@1,324,594 (B)> Also if you then go back it used to be the new replies number was gone but now it still displays until you manually refresh.
Update: I was basically correct about this being a caching thing.
Chrome deprecated the
unloadJavascript event this year, which the fora relied on to disable the browser's bfcache (back-forward cache) to ensure you'd get a fresh version of the bumps/topics page when using the back button, instead of a stale version from your browser's cache.
We also use the
Cache-Control: no-storeHTTP header, which also disables the bfcache in most browsers – but Chrome now ignores that:
> Although bfcache is not an HTTP cache, historically, when Cache-Control: no-store is set on the page resource itself (as opposed to any subresource), browsers have chosen not to store the page in bfcache so any pages using Cache-Control: no-store may not be eligible for bfcache. There is work underway to change this behavior for Chrome.
So I'm not sure if this issue is fixable. I guess I could detect when /bumps or /topics is loaded from the bfcache, and force the page to reload. Maybe that would be annoying though especially for people with slow/shitty connections.
tl;dr: Chrome sucks.
tteh !MemesToDNA double-posted this 1 year ago, 19 minutes later, 1 month after the original post[^] [v] #1,329,920
@previous (tteh !MemesToDNA)
> I guess I could detect when /bumps or /topics is loaded from the bfcache, and force the page to reload.
Done. Shitty solution but it works.
> I guess I could detect when /bumps or /topics is loaded from the bfcache, and force the page to reload.
Done. Shitty solution but it works.
Anonymous B replied with this 1 year ago, 4 hours later, 1 month after the original post[^] [v] #1,329,975
@1,329,916 (tteh !MemesToDNA)
I've been googling and apparently iframes aren't eligable for bfcache. Would it work if the topics table was embedded in one of them?
I've been googling and apparently iframes aren't eligable for bfcache. Would it work if the topics table was embedded in one of them?
Anonymous J replied with this 1 year ago, 30 minutes later, 1 month after the original post[^] [v] #1,329,976
@1,329,920 (tteh !MemesToDNA)
> >I guess I could detect when /bumps or /topics is loaded from the bfcache, and force the page to reload.
> Done. Shitty solution but it works.
If it's shitty then you should make sure it only runs this way on clients that claim to be chromium based. In this way you will not bend the knee to Google and the previous solution will continue to work on browsers that care about compatibility with web standards
> >I guess I could detect when /bumps or /topics is loaded from the bfcache, and force the page to reload.
> Done. Shitty solution but it works.
If it's shitty then you should make sure it only runs this way on clients that claim to be chromium based. In this way you will not bend the knee to Google and the previous solution will continue to work on browsers that care about compatibility with web standards